Now on ScienceBlogs: Pale Blue Dot

Seed Media Group

Profile

me_w.jpg
I'm a neuroscientist by training and a writer by inclination Contact me

rss2-1.png


Follow me on Twitter
Get e-mail updates

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Search


Selected posts

Books


wishlist.gif


My photos

www.flickr.com

Rotating blogroll

(Complete list/Shared items)

Archives

« Understanding ADHD | Main | Lobotomy & young-earth creationists »

Cannabis & psychosis

Category: LinksPsychiatry
Posted on: July 27, 2007 4:56 PM, by Mo

main_cannabis.jpg  

This week's issue of The Lancet contains the most comprehensive meta-analysis to date of the link between cannabis and psychosis:

The evidence is consistent with the view that cannabis increases risk of psychotic outcomes independently of confounding and transient intoxication effects, although evidence for affective outcomes is less strong. The uncertainty about whether cannabis causes psychosis is unlikely to be resolved by further longitudinal studies such as those reviewed here. However, we conclude that there is now sufficient evidence to warn young people that using cannabis could increase their risk of developing a psychotic illness later in life.

The journal's podcast includes an interview with Stanley Zimmet, of the Department of Psychological Medicine at Cardiff University, who is one of the authors of the study. 

I'm inclined to think that the long-term effects of cannabis (and those of any other psychotropic drug) very much depend on the mental composition of the individual using the drug. Therefore, smoking cannabis may increase the risk of psychosis or affective disorders, if one is somehow already predisposed to such a condition. But finding a correlation between two factors does not mean that one causes the other.

On a related note, there's an article in Slate, by a psychiatrist and a professor of psychology, who argue that addiction is not a brain disease (via Mind Hacks, where it is discussed further).

Share this: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

Trackbacks

Trackback URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/46682

Comments (7)

1

Andrew Sullivan's take on the political implications.

Posted by: Jason | July 27, 2007 6:18 PM

2

Well, of course addiction isn't a disease - in the way it's been redefined.

With the original definition - physiological adaptation to a drug that makes the drug necessary for normal functioning - addition is obviously a maladaptive disorder. But the new definition implies no such thing.

Posted by: Caledonian | July 27, 2007 7:34 PM

3

I don't really see this as anything but an assumption of causation. Indeed, I would suspect that the causation is probably there but in the reverse of the studies assumption, i.e. those who have a preexisting psychosis, are somewhat more likely to become regular pot smokers. Sorry, but this study seems little more than another propaganda tool, for more scare tactics that few kids will buy into.

A comment at the Wall Street Journal's health blog puts it into perspective;

Using US Drug policy data we can estimate how much risk a 40% increase entails. Marijuana use is only listed by Last Month Used, but being the most popular illicit drug, so overall usage numbers are close enough. The NHS**3 survey on drugs puts the lifetime use for any illicit drug at an average of 36% from 1979 – 2001* which puts 36% of the population at a 40% higher risk for schizophrenia and the other 64% for normal risk. Using the general population schizophrenia rate of .005 as the risk factor gives marijuana users a .006118 chance of schizophrenia as opposed to the .00437 odds for someone with a lifetime of drug abstinence. There’s your 40% from about 4/1000 to 6/1000.

Even if preexisting psychosis doesn't make it more likely that a person will smoke marijuana, this really doesn't seem like much of a big deal. If on the other hand, people with preexisting psychosis are more likely to smoke it, then theses numbers are even more meaningless.

The big problem that I have with b.s. studies like this one, is that there are very good reasons for kids not to smoke pot, or use other recreational drugs. The problem comes in when schools use scare tactics, based on the b.s. to try to keep kids off drugs, the kids realize that it's b.s. and ignore the whole message. When they see their friends doing it, without going nuts, they assume that it's ok. I think it's much better to give kids the real scoop and trust them to make a well informed decision, such as waiting until their brains have fully developed or are closer to full development, to experiment with drugs. Or decide not to do it at all, because there are risks, bad things can happen. Let then know the real risks, instead of stuffing them full of crap that they can discount wholesale.

Posted by: DuWayne | July 28, 2007 1:20 PM

4

Could it be called 'Pot-ter-mania'? Psychotic illnesses are actually multifactorial in nature. Both genetic and environmental factors seem to play a role.

Posted by: Amiya Sarkar | July 29, 2007 1:47 PM

5

I remember back in the old days, they use to blame LSD on psychotic behavior. There were all sorts of urban myths about the kid who tried LSD at a party and went c r a z y! I guess pot's the new bad boy.

Posted by: Susan | July 31, 2007 10:08 PM

6

Interesting

Posted by: Aina | November 27, 2007 3:46 PM

7

I think that one of the key factors in any discussion of marijuana's long-term effects should be the POTENCY of the weed's THC content.

Some of the selectively bred species of weed on sale in Amsterdam coffee houses have THC contents way up in the 20% range, which is enough to knock even a seasoned weed smoker on their ass.

It wouldn't be too much of a stretch to imagine some of those uber-strong marijuana species triggering chemical imbalances in the brain that would have been unheard of just a few years ago, before the selective breeeding horticulture of marijuana became such an exact science.

Posted by: Pinoakyo | December 27, 2007 11:45 PM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)

ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter
Visit the Collective Imagination blog
Advertisement

© 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM